ToyfareMark
Vegeta
A WINNER IS YOU!
In Hutch I trust!
Posts: 9,626
|
Post by ToyfareMark on Apr 18, 2009 22:17:20 GMT -5
I've always wondered why they went with Slaughter teaming with Adnan and Sheik. It would have made much more sense to have Slaughter team with Undertaker against Hogan and Warrior. I believe they had alot of matches like that during the summer of 91.
I'm sure they could have done the match with Slaughter doing the job to protect Taker. It just didnt make any sense, it was basically a handicap match with Slaughter at the disadvantage.
I guess they wanted to use Taker with Jake in the wedding reception angle, but he still could have been in the match and took part in that, and probably could have started his angle with Sid during the match.
Anyway I've always just wondered why it was booked the way it was.
|
|
|
Post by blef on Apr 18, 2009 22:32:14 GMT -5
That match was the end of Iraqi Slaughter, basically, so they probably just wanted the blow off to the Slaughter/Hogan feud (which sent Mustafa and Adnan to the midcard for good). Taker being a part of that would've tarnished him, especially since a few months later he'd be pinning Hogan for the title.
|
|
ToyfareMark
Vegeta
A WINNER IS YOU!
In Hutch I trust!
Posts: 9,626
|
Post by ToyfareMark on Apr 18, 2009 22:37:30 GMT -5
That match was the end of Iraqi Slaughter, basically, so they probably just wanted the blow off to the Slaughter/Hogan feud (which sent Mustafa and Adnan to the midcard for good). Taker being a part of that would've tarnished him, especially since a few months later he'd be pinning Hogan for the title. I get what you're saying there....but if that was the case I would have had Hogan defend the title against Slaughter in a handicap match, and have Warrior get beaten by Taker in a gimmick match.
|
|
|
Post by JerryvonKramer on Apr 18, 2009 22:38:48 GMT -5
Why did they bother bringing in Sheik for that angle in the first place?
|
|
ToyfareMark
Vegeta
A WINNER IS YOU!
In Hutch I trust!
Posts: 9,626
|
Post by ToyfareMark on Apr 18, 2009 22:44:21 GMT -5
Why did they bother bringing in Sheik for that angle in the first place? The real silly part is how they ignore all of his history despite it clearly being Sheik, Piper points it out though I think.
|
|
|
Post by JerryvonKramer on Apr 19, 2009 6:34:11 GMT -5
That and the HORRIBLE insensitivity of getting an IRANIAN guy to play an Iraqi, Saddam Hussein supporter. Blissfully overlooking the fact that Saddam killed millions of Iranians in a protracted and bloody war.
Still -- foreigners heh? All the bloody same in they? Iran, Iraq, what's the difference? Must go down as one of the lowest moments for the WWF.
|
|
Beans
Team Rocket
Posts: 921
|
Post by Beans on Apr 19, 2009 7:27:20 GMT -5
Don't see why? Jewish actors are cast as Nazi/Hitler supporters in movies about the subject quite often. Why is this any different?
|
|
Hiroshi Hase
Patti Mayonnaise
The Good Ol' Days
Posts: 30,755
|
Post by Hiroshi Hase on Apr 19, 2009 8:50:57 GMT -5
I thought it would've made sense to have Taker there too as they did the Slaughter/Adnan/Taker vs. Hogan/Warrior match a few times that year, one of them on Coliseum Video.
But it still worked out ok, well at least for 4 of those guys anyways.
|
|
|
Post by JerryvonKramer on Apr 19, 2009 8:51:48 GMT -5
Don't see why? Jewish actors are cast as Nazi/Hitler supporters in movies about the subject quite often. Why is this any different? Because the Iran-Iraq war finished in 1988 and this was 1991, whereas the end of Nazism was in 1945? Also, the politics of this are a bit different. He went from being an Iranian "Other" who got booed because of where he's from to being an Iraqi "Other" who got booed, as if the two nations are interchangeable -- I don't think any film would treat Jews and Nazis in the same way. On the scale of horrible xenophobic things in wrestling, Col. Mustafa ranks pretty highly for me. Out of interest, which Jews have played Nazis? Just want to know.
|
|
Beans
Team Rocket
Posts: 921
|
Post by Beans on Apr 19, 2009 8:59:46 GMT -5
Werner Klemperer.
To be honest if the American audience was willing to boo someone just because of what country they were born in as they did and to be honest still do at various wrestling angles, I don't think the audience has much of a leg to stand on when it comes to calls of racism and xenaphobia.
Look at Mohammed Hassan, he started off as a fair neutral character but he was booed because he was an Arab-American and they then played with that.
You can't have it both ways. Can't give someone heat for being a different race, nationality, sexual orientation, religion or whatever and then complain when a wrestling promotor takes that heat and tries to make money from it.
|
|
|
Post by blef on Apr 19, 2009 12:14:15 GMT -5
That match was the end of Iraqi Slaughter, basically, so they probably just wanted the blow off to the Slaughter/Hogan feud (which sent Mustafa and Adnan to the midcard for good). Taker being a part of that would've tarnished him, especially since a few months later he'd be pinning Hogan for the title. I get what you're saying there....but if that was the case I would have had Hogan defend the title against Slaughter in a handicap match, and have Warrior get beaten by Taker in a gimmick match. I had totally forgot about the Warrior/Taker feud that they were presumably still a part of at this time. .....I'm at a loss. That and the HORRIBLE insensitivity of getting an IRANIAN guy to play an Iraqi, Saddam Hussein supporter. Blissfully overlooking the fact that Saddam killed millions of Iranians in a protracted and bloody war. Also, I believe Adnan once said in an interview that he fled Iraq because of Saddam's possessive desire to see all Iraqi athletes do well "or else". So having him playing a Saddam loyalist must've been just as bad...
|
|
|
Post by Citizen Snips on Apr 19, 2009 12:23:29 GMT -5
That and the HORRIBLE insensitivity of getting an IRANIAN guy to play an Iraqi, Saddam Hussein supporter. Blissfully overlooking the fact that Saddam killed millions of Iranians in a protracted and bloody war. Still -- foreigners heh? All the bloody same in they? Iran, Iraq, what's the difference? Must go down as one of the lowest moments for the WWF. Unless Vince McMahon kidnapped every member of the Iron Sheik's family and had them dangling over a volcano in order to get Sheik to do this, it ultimately is on the Sheik's shoulders that he chose to do this. If he had a problem with it, he could've simply said no. However, he said yes, so either he didn't have a problem with it or he did have a problem with it, but not a big enough problem with it to refuse to accept money for doing it. It's very easy to blame the horrible ideas solely on the promoter and they deserve much of the blame, but I think too often the performer gets a pass because "he needs to make a living" and apparently, doing whatever anyone else says is the only way to do so. Nikolai Volkoff escaped from Yugoslavia to avoid living in a Communist state, yet played a Soviet villain for years. Harlem Heat were allegedly going to allow themselves to be portrayed as Jim Crow-style prisoners or outright slaves, depending on how the story is told. Simply casting the promoter as the sole villain is such matters of tastelessness overlooks the fact that the wrestlers themselves are the ones who ultimately put these characters on the screen.
|
|
|
Post by JerryvonKramer on Apr 19, 2009 12:43:20 GMT -5
Oh I'm not saying Sheiky baby was blameless either -- he was probably too out of his head to even know what was going on -- but it's one step beyond the normal xenophobic badness we get in wrestling.
I mean, it's a side of the business I've never liked or enjoyed, being British I find it ALL a bit distasteful, but having the Iranian guy ... and not just ANY Iranian guy, a former World Champ "Iran No. 1" Iranian guy who EVERYONE KNOWS is Iranian ... cast as the Iraqi guy elevates it to a whole other level of wrongness for me.
I mean, I just don't get it: were we meant to try to forget that that was Sheik there? Were we meant to pretend that Iran and Iraq get on now and that it was perfectly feasible for an Iranian to become a Saddam sympathizer? Or was it assumed that the average American sitting at home a) wouldn't know the difference between Iran and Iraq and b) in any case, wouldn't care about their recent history of bloodshed?
I'm not defending Sheik, but whoever came up with that idea was insulting the intelligence of the fans, both nations involved, any Iranian or Iraqi people who happened to be watches, and, at some level, Sheik himself.
Has anyone ever thought to ask him about it on one of those shoot interviews? I can't think of many more objectionable things we've seen in wrestling ... maybe the whole Akeem gimmick is approaching it, but it's the sort of thing that might make someone with an education like Lex Luger ashamed to be associated with wrestling.
|
|
|
Post by Citizen Snips on Apr 19, 2009 13:28:22 GMT -5
From a storyline perspectibe, there's several outs. The first is that it was a story about turncoats. Just as Slaughter turned on his country to support Iraq, Sheik did the same. I also don't believe (a Piper commentary slip aside), that the character was portrayed as the Iron Sheik turning into Colonel Mustafa. It was simply a new character portrayed by the same performer. Zodiac didn't cut people's hair. Diesel didn't come out with a midget yelling about Oz.
I feel this discussion is bound to end up political, as we could provide examples from throughout history of people turning on their countires for various reasons to further the opposing arguments, all in discussion of a pro wrestling angle that lasted for a year. As such, I shall bow out now.
|
|
|
Post by OGBoardPoster2005 on Apr 19, 2009 13:52:31 GMT -5
To anyone whose seen the 40 man battle royal on Coliseum Video from 1992, when they're introducing the wrestlers, it shows Mustafa and Savage(on commentary) says "Check out the Iron Sheik...err Col. Mustafa aka". So I think the WWF flat out acknowledged that it was Sheik using his real name or something
|
|
|
Post by johnnyk9 on Apr 19, 2009 14:25:34 GMT -5
When Mustafa debuted on both SuperStars and Challenge right after WM7 both McMahon and Monsoon said flat out it was The Iron Sheik
|
|
Nr1Humanoid
Hank Scorpio
Is the #3 humanoid at best.
Posts: 5,526
|
Post by Nr1Humanoid on Apr 20, 2009 12:52:53 GMT -5
Out of interest, which Jews have played Nazis? Just want to know. Jewish actor Steven Berkoff (Beverly Hills Cop) played Adolf Hitler in War and Remembrance.
|
|
Crappler El 0 M
Dalek
Never Forgets an Octagon
I'm a good R-Truth.
Posts: 58,479
|
Post by Crappler El 0 M on Apr 20, 2009 12:58:26 GMT -5
As far as changing Sheik, the only reason I can think that they would change him is because Sheik was from Iran and had Iran written on his pants and said, "Iran Number One."
As far as booking it that way, I think back then WWE had tried using tag matches with Hogan and the people he had been feuding with as main event of Summer Slam (with S.Slam 90 being an exception).
|
|
|
Post by bigsplash on Apr 20, 2009 13:37:36 GMT -5
yeah the WWF didn't ignore it was Sheik as Mustafa, they just didn't go out of their way to say it was him. they even mentioned he was a former WWF champion, so obviously they established it was him
as for the main event, it was a bit of a joke, I don't know ANYBODY that actually believed that team Slaughter had a chance of winning. It was Slaughter (who's credibility as a threat was already almost gone), Mustafa, and a glorified jobber manager vs HOGAN AND WARRIOR.
They should have tossed Taker in there to at least make the other team a bit of a threat.
WWF knew it was a weak main event, as they even tossed in the Sid Justice special ref angle in order to at least put some intrigue into it.
Thankfully the rest of the event was spectacular so it can be forgiven. I think this main event though really prevented Summerslam 91 from becoming one of the all time greats.
|
|
|
Post by JerryvonKramer on Apr 21, 2009 6:20:12 GMT -5
Why wasn't Undertaker even on the card?
Also, "one of the all time greats"? I count 2 good matches there: Perfect vs. Hart and DiBiase vs. Virgil (mainly for the HEAT).
The rest of the card though ... IRS vs. a face over-the-hill Greg Valentine in JTTS mode? Natural Disasters vs. The Bushwackers? It's not the best of cards is it? And so much talent wasted in that 6 man tag.
|
|